How we fought to save our local college – and won

When the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea sought to sell off a local college, they reckoned without the passion and organisational skills of local residents, says Samantha Batra.

It started in the wind and the rain outside the gates of the beleaguered college. It started with a gathering of staunch campaigners in 2016 as news leaked out that the Kensington and Chelsea College (KCC) board had sold the land and building that housed its Wornington Road site.

The site was sold to Kensington and Chelsea council who were notorious for “regeneration” development; and it was no surprise that the “Royal Borough” had plans (word had it) to demolish the building and build luxury apartments.

The deal was clandestine but soon rumour spread and it stirred our North Kensington community. At times, members of the regime came out and tried to intimidate the protestors. We were not put off. However, when the Grenfell atrocity happened, the tragic loss of our friends and neighbours traumatised us with a pain that permeates our people still. Our battle to save our precious college was accelerated as our community struggled with a raw, open wound. 

At a community meeting at Bevington Primary School in September 2017 we challenged the powers that reigned, though we were repeatedly told by the board and executive and the leaders of RBKC that that there was simply no money left.

Our college was being forced into a toxic merger with Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College (EHWLC) and there was no alternative. They even started to decamp the college assets and ship them out to EHWLC; most of the hairdressing and beauty equipment simply disappeared over a few days.

Emboldened by anger, frustration and sorrow, our campaign snowballed and we reached into the far corners of our community and ensured that people were informed about the skulduggery. Some people were sceptical, but we maintained the pressure, holding a weekly street stall in Portobello Road, handing out leaflets, making videos, circulating mischievous lampoons and staging noisy demonstrations at Wornington Road and even Hortensia Road (the other KCC site). Time and again, we invited people to come and discuss with us the possibilities for our much neglected friend, the “invisible” college. We met in stuffy school halls and other community spaces and all were welcome.

Our campaign group – made up of disparate people – fought on, all of us giving countless hours and our energy. Sometimes we didn’t agree but we had a common goal and we stuck to it. We met ministers and mandarins along the way in the hallowed corridors of power. Some seemed powerless, others listened and took action.

When the outgoing KCC board and executive congratulate themselves on their achievements, as in the FE Week article of January 15, applauding the “new culture of openness and trust, paving the way for the KCC merger”, remember that we have been pitched against them for more than three and a half years. They would have long submitted to the disastrous merger with EHWLC at the end of 2017. It was the Save Wornington College Campaign who pressed for more, who enabled the damning Kroll Report that pointed to the machinations of the council and the rotten governance of the college that led to the sale of the community’s land and buildings.

Now that we have finally arrived at this alliance with Morley College, after months and months of negotiations, we are engaged in the transition of KCC to Morley College, North Kensington.

“The opportunity to achieve this vision is the result of determined advocacy and activism in the North Kensington community, led by the Save Wornington College Campaign,” stated Morley College’s press release on February 3, 2020.

We are determined to ensure that Morley College deliver their promises and honour the Grenfell legacy. They have shown commitment. Now is their chance to show us their integrity and be part of the renaissance of a venerable and precious community college.

Let’s celebrate the many apprenticeship successes

Jennifer Coupland took over as chief executive of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education last November. She reflects on her first National Apprenticeship Week (NAW) in the post.

It has been a pleasure to travel across the country during NAW and speak to so many people who deliver and benefit from fantastic apprenticeships.

Memorable moments included talking to business representatives and providers about apprenticeship priorities.

An important focus for us all looking ahead will be quality. We run the Quality Alliance with the Education and Skills Funding Agency, Ofsted, Ofqual, Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) and the Office for Students (OfS). I will make sure we all work closely together to ensure apprenticeships truly deliver for employers and apprentices.

Attending the NAW conference meant I got to meet and hear from those who feel passionate about degree-level apprenticeships.

We now have over 100 of these higher-level apprenticeship standards, a similar number of standards at level four and five, and just under 300 at levels two and three. This all provides for fantastic opportunities for people to progress.

I’m committed to apprenticeships at all levels, and we are hearing encouraging feedback on how they are opening out a huge variety of professions – including accountancy, the law, and nursing – to people from wider backgrounds.

On our website we have revamped our occupational maps, which chart the best routes that apprentices can take across the skills system.

On Wednesday last I also attended the BAE Systems Apprenticeships Awards, where I had the honour of presenting five awards for ‘outstanding achievement’.

This was a particularly touching category as it focused on apprentices who had overcome some really significant challenges in their lives – including long spells of illness or unemployment.

They were now flying high in their apprenticeships – and being great role models for others, which was fantastic to see. It was obvious from people’s reactions to being nominated and winning quite how much recognition of their achievements matters. One winner looked quite choked – and my table of engineers started to tear up too!

NAW unfailingly provides a fantastic opportunity to celebrate the many successes of apprenticeships.

But there is always more to do – and other priorities for the institute in the coming months will be improving our funding decision making processes and simplifying how external quality assurance works.

However, the outlook is good. I have seen so much impressive progress with the development of the employer-led reforms since I started as Deputy Director of the Apprenticeships Unit eight years ago.

It has been thrilling to see how far things have moved on since I started in my new role. I remember when we set up the first trailblazer employer groups – look how far we’ve come now!

We have thousands of employers on board with developing and delivering apprenticeships and there have now been more than 500,000 starts on standards.

There is so much to be proud of and I would like to thank everyone – employers, providers, awarding organisations and apprentices – who is making this happen. 

Providers and the government need to better manage subcontracting

This week the ESFA published 10 subcontracting proposals in a consultation document. The FE sector is encouraged to respond – and this should put an end to speculation of a complete subcontracting ban, says Peter Mucklow

This week we published a consultation proposing reforms to the delivery of subcontracted further education provision. The proposal is calling on FE providers to give feedback on the proposed reforms by March 17. This won’t be a surprise to the sector. We have been very open about our intent to review subcontracting and we trailed our review, the reasons for it and that we would consult on it, in a personal letter from Eileen Milner to all providers receiving post-16 funds back in October 2019.

Current arrangements are not good enough

I hope the consultation quells concerns about rumours of a complete ban on subcontracting. We know that subcontracting can enrich a learner’s experience, be a necessity in some geographical locations, and – for some learner groups – be a gateway to participation. That said, current arrangements are not good enough. Some cases of subcontracting demonstrate poor planning, and too many show insufficient and inadequate oversight by those who have made the decision to subcontract provision. When this happens, unsatisfactory practice can creep in – with unacceptable consequences for both learners and the public purse.

We all want the FE and skills sector to be known for having a great reputation both nationally and internationally. As the organisation responsible for funding, it is important that we consistently review, challenge and be willing to change our practice – to make things better, and to offer the very best value for money both to our learners and to taxpayers.

This review is broad in scope, and because of its breadth and depth, we know some of these changes may take a period of years, rather than months, to fully implement. But it is important and timely to start the journey and see it through.

We need to make changes that make a positive difference

The improvement in oversight of subcontracting is not just looking at what providers can do. We know there are things the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) need to do better, which is why we are looking at how we can be more transparent in the requirements we set out, and how we use data more effectively to address concerns earlier.

However, lead providers are ultimately responsible for the subcontracting agreements they enter into – and they must improve their oversight of subcontracted provision. Learners on subcontracted provision are enrolled with lead providers – and they have every right to expect their provision to be managed as if it were directly controlled by the provider themselves.

We must be satisfied that we are managing public money properly, so we need to make changes that make a positive difference. But we must do it in a fair way – a way that respects the fact that providers may need some time to implement certain aspects of the reforms. We can only do this if organisations and networks talk and engage in the debate.

That is why we are asking those in the FE sector to tell us what they think about the proposed changes by March 17 – thus helping us make meaningful change and improvement to subcontracting

DfE lobby Treasury with findings that FE can’t survive ‘as is’ without ‘relaxing the financial pressure’

Colleges are providing “good quality” FE despite facing “significant cost pressures” and if the sector is to survive “as is” the Treasury needs to pump more funding into it, according to new Department for Education research.

In what appears to be a pre-budget pitch to the chancellor, a new report states that there is “nothing to suggest that any financial challenges that our providers may be experiencing are due to poor planning, budgeting and/or monitoring of their provision”.

The study, conducted by acl consulting, looked at the costs and cost drivers in the FE sector. It found that at a time when the base unit of funding has been fixed for a number of years, increasingly providers have had to “go to considerable lengths in order to make the income they receive cover the costs they incur”.

Courses and apprenticeships continue to be “reduced” and “lost”, group sizing and workload is increasing, job cuts have had to be imposed and pay rises are made “infrequently”.

These factors make recruitment and retention of all staff, academic and non-academic, “more difficult” as more “attractive” employment opportunities exist outside the sector.

And when it comes to financial viability, “our project suggests that general FE colleges and sixth form colleges are currently facing significant cost pressures which, without an immediate (and significant) increase in income, many providers will have difficulties in meeting: this will have significant impacts on the sector”.

“Overall, our work suggests that, if the FE sector to survive ‘as is’, consideration needs to be given to relaxing the financial pressure it is currently operating under,” the report adds.

It goes on to list more “extremely serious” financial challenges facing colleges, including the impact of unfunded increases in pensions and “other pay-related costs over which providers have no control”.

The resourcing of English and Maths provision for those without a GCSE at grade 4 or above also poses “considerable – and increasing – challenges”.

The availability of professional support for mental health-related issues is a “particular cause for concern”, as is the capacity to carry extra costs for high needs learners.

And there are no “sufficient funds” for necessary capital expenditure, the report notes: IT is now “sufficiently obsolete for efficient delivery and the credibility of the curriculum to be increasingly at risk”, and delivery of the curriculum offer is “being compromised by the lack of necessary equipment”.

For general FE colleges in particular, transport costs are having an impact on “learners’ ability to get to college and therefore on recruitment”.

The report said its quantitative data presents a picture of providers who are “providing good quality FE whilst largely balancing their budgets” and the qualitative findings “show a sector under considerable pressure and with serious concerns about its future”.

The cost pressures facing FE providers “will go beyond further reductions in relatively ‘easier’-to-cut costs and further rounds of the incremental changes already seen (group sizes further increased; options within programme areas further reduced; self-directed learning used more widely etc.)”.

“The risk is that whole curriculum areas will be lost and that colleges – including some of the good/excellent ones we have seen – will disappear,” the report states. It also warns that the position of sixth form colleges appears to be “particularly acute”.

On a relatively more cheerful note, the report said that based on the more limited information available, “we have fewer concerns for independent learning providers.”

In the Conservative’s 2019 manifesto, the party promised £1.8 billion for new college capital projects and a £600 million a year “new National Skills Fund”.

The next budget is scheduled to take place on 11 March.

 

College leaders brand use of bailout funds ‘staggering’

The government has come under fire from successful college leaders after a series of FE Week freedom of information requests revealed exactly how £111 million of bailout funding has been spent.

Four colleges struck secretive Fresh Start deals with the government, the largest of which was for £54 million at Hull College Group.

Each deal, agreed by the ESFA Transaction Unit and funded from a Treasury ‘restructuring fund’, included millions to write-off bank and government loans.

“I knew it was a big figure, but this goes way beyond a bailout.”

Hull College for example, received close to £2.5 million to write off bank loans and a further £24 million to write off the government loan, known as exceptional financial support.

Mike Hopkins, principal at South and City College Birmingham, described the debt-write offs for “failing colleges” as “incredible”.

And we now know the deals also included huge sums of capital funding, for building upgrades as well as IT hardware and software.

In the case of Cornwall College, of the £30 million bailout, close to £7 million has been spent on capital, including IT hardware and software.

Chris Todd, chartered accountant and principal of Derwentside College, described the sums as “staggering” and “handing out almost £4 million to fund IT upgrades and paying off debts of over £20 million does not strike me as a good, or appropriate use of public funds”.

“I know we need to protect the students during a recovery, but when are we going to stand up as a sector and challenge this?” he added.

And a third principal that did not want to be named said: “While I support intervention and financial support to ensure students are looked after, it does seem extraordinary that in a climate where no college has enough money a failing college is made debt free, given millions for IT and money for capital.

“I knew it was a big figure, but this goes way beyond a bailout.”

A Department for Education summary of restructuring fund spend shows in total close to £450 million had been spent on bailouts by the end of the last academic year and ESFA accounts reveal more than £100 million in loans have also been written-off.

The DfE has defended the use of public funds for bailouts, with a spokesperson telling FE Week: “Restructuring facility funding was provided where there was no alternative.

“In cases where the level of debt was assessed as unsustainable, debt was replaced with restructuring facility funding.

“Where the future sustainability of a college has been affected by the postponement of investment in the estate, this funding was provided for essential works, including IT upgrades.”

But it seems the ESFA deals were not so sweet for successful colleges encouraged to merge.

Hopkins said: “It is well known that we were underfunded as the first college through the area review merger process. As a consequence our debt levels, that we were required to begin the merger with, are significantly in excess of the maximums deemed appropriate in the sector and well in excess of the banks requirements.

“This has meant that we are unable to get bank support and has inhibited our investment, despite being a good college. We have been told that despite the original deal being wrong, as accepted by the ESFA, they cannot pay off the £5 million loan we were required to take. Therefore I find it incredible that millions can be found to pay-off the debts for failing colleges.”

“When are we going to stand up as a sector and challenge this?”

And in the case of Hadlow College Group, where debts are still being added up and likely to reach close to £100 million, the government pulled the plug and called in an education administrator for the first and so far only time.

Several other leaders at successful colleges shared their reactions anonymously.

One college principal told FE Week: “I can’t see how such levels of support are offered to some but not others can ever be fair. In what ways can such large bailouts and infrastructure support, be justified to some colleges but not others?”

Another said: “I think in fairness terms it would be good to know how many other deals got this kind of investment. I suppose where it stings is that others of us are running very tightly managed ships, making compromises and costs cuts because of funding constraints and yet learners in Cornwall will be better served as a result of the failure – that’s the bit that doesn’t sit right in terms of public purse.”

Todd concluded that “we need a system that stops this from happening in the first place, and that rewards the best colleges.”

Minister warns college bosses it could go bust next year

A minister has warned a college that it could go bust next year if learner losses are not reversed and the sale of a campus is “delayed further”.

Lord Agnew wrote to Warrington and Vale Royal College chair Mervyn Ward last month with the concern following intervention from the FE Commissioner Richard Atkins which found it is at “significant risk of insolvency”.

Atkins’ report, published today, said there are “no major concerns” around the governance and leadership of the college, as processes and clerking arrangements “are good”.

But they face “several key challenges”, the most significant of which concerns a “very weak financial position and a need to generate funds through land sales”.

The college controversially closed its campus in Hartford, Cheshire, last year. According to a BBC report from 2018, £10 million was spent on brand new buildings for the site in 2012. More than 75 jobs were put at risk.

It included a construction skills centre, sports facilities and performing arts building with auditorium.

Warrington and Vale Royal College has been trying to sell the site since 2018. FE Week has asked the college for the current state of the sale, and reasons for why it has been delayed.

Agnew’s letter said the “importance of this sale to ensuring the future viability of the college cannot be overstated and I advise you to prioritise its successful completion and to continue making robust financial preparations to maintain solvency should the sale be delayed further”.

Several other colleges have had to sell-off campuses to balance the books in recent years, including Cornwall College Group and Birmingham Metropolitan College. All of them were met with opposition from their local MP.

Warrington and Vale Royal was formed from a merger between Warrington Collegiate and Mid Cheshire College (MCC) in 2017 – a task which “proved to be highly challenging”, according to Atkins’ report.

There was a “huge loss of learners from MCC (around 900 students aged 16 to 18) which started prior to 2015/16 but has accelerated since the merger to a position where student numbers across both the former MCC sites are below 400”.

“Falling student numbers and income together with inherited challenges from MCC have put significant cash pressures on the merged college, despite staff restructures seeking to align costs to income,” the report added.

Agnew said the “significant and continuing loss of learners from the former Mid-Cheshire campuses is an extremely concerning trend which the senior leadership team must address with immediate effect”.

He added: “The FE Commissioner’s report confirms that the college is in a very weak financial position and is at significant risk of insolvency by 2020/21 unless appropriate steps are taken to secure the liquidity of the college.”

Atkins’ report said there was a “significant deficit forecast” in 2018/19, the college’s accounts for which are yet to be published. As a result, the FE Commissioner recommended that the governing body “must insist” on a “break even or better” budget for 2020/21.

A spokesperson for the college said: “Like many other FE colleges across the country, Warrington and Vale Royal College has experienced continued financial challenge and the ESFA have issued a financial notice to improve for 2017/18 in the context of a more stringent intervention regime that came into force in April 2019.

“The college has been working closely with the ESFA and the FE Commissioner team to monitor and improve the financial health of the college and will continue to do so until the college is in financial recovery and the notice is lifted.”

The FE Commissioner’s report said the college has suffered from low student recruitment because of “poor quality provision” on offer.

During his visit, staff also highlighted “high levels of sub-contracting with a low contribution from in-house provision” as another reason for the structural deficit.

The chair reported to the FE Commissioner that the governors were “aware of the need to swiftly determine and implement a future strategy that addresses the significant decline in student numbers at the MCC former sites and the inability of the new college to maintain financial stability whilst supporting an estate footprint that far outweighs demand”.

Warrington and Vale Royal College was graded ‘good’ by Ofsted in its first full inspection since the merger in November 2019.

Troubled college to tumble two Ofsted grades from ‘outstanding’

A college that is currently investigating an unexpected £6 million deficit is set to be downgraded by Ofsted from ‘outstanding’ to ‘requires improvement’.

It is the latest blow to Gateshead College, which has also seen its high-profile principal and chair quit in recent weeks.

The college announced to staff last Friday that it received a preliminary grade three after a visit from the education watchdog in late January.

A spokesperson said they were unable to comment on Ofsted’s verdict until the findings are made official and its report has been published.

FE Week understands that management and leadership was the key area that brought the college’s rating down. Staff are understood to be angry, as they believe the overall grade is not a fair reflection of student performance or teaching provision.

Ofsted was drafted into Gateshead, which was given a grade one in 2015, after the college discovered a shock £6 million shortfall in September – just weeks after its finance director went on sick leave.

FE Week understands the results of an external forensic investigation into the cause of its current financial position was scheduled to be presented to the executive at the college this week.

Gateshead received a financial notice to improve from the Education and Skills Funding Agency last month after it had “been assessed as experiencing serious cash flow pressures”. The college is now in formal intervention.

The independent audit into the deficit had been commissioned by the college’s ex-chair, John McCabe.

He resigned last month, after just six months in the role, “following discussions with the FE Commissioner about what the college needed right now”.

The former highest-paid principal in the country, Judith Doyle, also retired from Gateshead with immediate effect on December 31.

A spokesperson for the college said the decision to bring forward her intention to retire was “hers, in the belief that it was in the college’s best interests [for her] to step aside now, enabling the new three-year plan to be delivered by the team with the support of the ESFA and FE Commissioner”.

Doyle was the highest-paid principal in the country in 2017/18, when she received a salary of between £340,001 and £350,000.

The college’s financial statement for the year ended July 31, 2018 also showed six other key management staff were paid between £110,001 and £190,000.

Former deputy FE commissioner John Hogg was drafted in as the new chair while deputy principal Chris Toon took over as acting principal.

Toon announced a redundancy consultation was underway in January, with 26 jobs at risk – to help “address some short-term financial pressures the college is facing at the moment”.

He said the job losses would mainly be within business support areas, adding that a voluntary severance scheme had been opened “to mitigate as far as possible the number of compulsory redundancies”.

The college previously told FE Week a “highly experienced interim financial director” was appointed before Christmas, and that it was considering “options for short-term funding loans”.

It was also confirmed that a new three-year financial plan is hoped to return Gateshead College to surplus by 2020-2021.

It recorded a surplus of £748,000 in 2017-18, according to its latest accounts.

The financial objectives for 2018/19 had included achieving a surplus of £535,000 and continuing to improve the college’s financial health score to reach ‘outstanding’.

Ofsted watch: Two sixth form colleges score top grades

Two sixth form colleges have been declared ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted, with one retaining their top grade after more than a decade without inspection.

Meanwhile, a publicly-owned private provider has dropped to a grade three after nine years as a grade one.

After its last inspection in 2008, Peter Symonds College yet again achieved a grade one in all areas of its provision.

Most of its 4,200 students achieve high grades in their A-levels and are “well-prepared for their aspirational next steps to prestigious universities,” inspectors found.

College leaders and managers place a “very strong” emphasis on maintaining the wellbeing of their staff by allowing them to take part in activities which balance out their working lives like yoga and pilates.

Resultingly, staff feel “very well supported and repay managers by promoting the college’s ambitious culture for all its students”.

Elsewhere, Callywith College earned a grade one in its first inspection since converting to a 16 to 19 academy in September 2017.

It teaches 1,081 students, who were found to be “overwhelmingly positive” about all aspects of college life, despite having to travel a considerable distance to attend.

Inspectors found the college had an environment which was “exceptionally supportive and caring” but also “calm and positive” – which allows students to thrive while focusing intently on their learning and personal development.

Safeguarding was considered to be effective, as it was with Peter Symonds.

Greater Brighton Metropolitan College was found to have made ‘significant progress’ in how leaders and managers have trained teachers, especially those who teach levels 2 and 3, to support students, with high needs.

This was after a grade three full inspection found teachers did not have sufficient skills, knowledge or information to be able to meet those students’ requirements.

But since then, leaders have provided mandatory training for teachers so they know what types of support students with high needs may require and how to go about providing this.

Nottingham College, on the other hand, earned a grade three in its first inspection since being formed from a merger of New College Nottingham and Central College Nottingham in 2017.

Too often, inspectors wrote, its managers and staff aim to meet the minimum requirements of qualifications.

St Helens College has also been hit with a grade three, despite the interim principal having begun to stabilise it following its merger with Knowsley Community College, which an FE Commissioner report last year found had been underfunded.

Governors need to establish a stable leadership team to create an aspirational culture and ambitious curriculum, the report reads.

Hoople Ltd, a publicly-owned private provider created by Herefordshire Council and Wye Valley NHS Trust, went from a grade one to a grade three this week.

The ‘outstanding’ score was awarded in 2011 to Hoople, which holds contracts with the government to deliver apprenticeships and study programmes and does so to 46 apprentices and 22 learners.

The apprentices were studying a curriculum which inspectors did consider to not “consistently challenge them and enable them to reach their potential”: it is often too focused on achieving qualifications, rather than their personal development.

Independent provider Absolute HR Solutions also received a grade three, partly because “too many” apprentices have withdrawn early.

But inspectors complimented leaders and managers on their clear strategic vision and said the 34 apprentices receive good support from staff.

Agincare Group, a care provider with 78 apprentices, was also handed a grade three as trainers and assessors have focused too much on “unchallenging tasks” which apprentices needed to complete, instead of setting work which makes them think hard.

Apprentices, especially those with prior experience, do not always find the work sufficiently demanding, the report reads.

Employer provider Medivet received a grade three also, for its provision to 161 apprentices.

But leaders were found to have a good understanding of the skills required by the industry, and staff enable learners to cumulatively develop knowledge and skills.

Yet too many of them were making slow progress towards qualifying as registered veterinary nurses.

DART Limited and Straight A Training Limited both maintained their ‘good’ grades at a short inspection this week.

And East Surrey College, GTG Training, Welcome Skills, Pentland Assessment Centres and Urban Education and Training Group all made ‘reasonable progress’ in every area of a monitoring visit.

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
East Surrey College 23/01/2020 06/02/2020 M 2
Greater Brighton Metropolitan College 23/01/2020 07/02/2020 M 3
Nottingham College 17/01/2020 07/02/2020 3 N/A
St Helens College 17/01/2020 07/02/2020 3 N/A

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Absolute HR Solutions Ltd 23/01/2020 06/02/2020 3 M
Agincare Group Limited 17/01/2020 06/02/2020 3 M
DART Limited 14/01/2020 03/02/2020 2 2
GTG Training Limited 22/01/2020 07/02/2020 M 3
Hoople Ltd 23/01/2020 04/02/2020 3 1
N A College Trust 16/01/2020 05/02/2020 2 N/A
Straight A Training Limited 23/01/2020 05/02/2020 2 2
The Apprenticeship College Ltd 10/01/2020 07/02/2020 2 M
Pentland Assessment Centres Ltd 09/01/2020 06/02/2020 M N/A
Urban Education & Training Group Limited 15/01/2020 03/02/2020 M N/A
Welcome Skills Limited 17/01/2020 05/02/2020 M M

 

Sixth Form Colleges (inc 16-19 academies) Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Callywith College 14/01/2020 07/02/2020 1 N/A
Peter Symonds College 17/01/2020 04/02/2020 1 1

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Medivet 10/01/2020 06/02/2020 3 M

 

Khan criticised as being ‘wasteful’ for £40k splurge on AEB consultant

London’s mayor is planning to spend up to £40,000 of the capital’s adult education budget on hiring a consultant to review a consultation – despite employing more than 50 staff to manage the policy.

The move has been slammed as “wasteful”, with one college principal labelling it as “just wrong”.

Newly published agenda papers for the Skills for Londoners Board meeting, scheduled for February 11, show that officials are preparing to launch a third ‘Skills for Londoners Framework Consultation’ this month.

The document notes that an outside firm would be used to summarise consultation responses at a cost of “up to £40,000” which would be “contained within the overall AEB budget 2020/21”.

Officials advise board members, made up of London borough councillors and FE sector representatives, that without the extra help a “significant amount of officer time will be required to analyse the responses to the framework consultation”.

A Greater London Authority (GLA) spokesperson told FE Week there are 52.5 full-time staff directly working on the AEB for the current financial year, some of whom also work on European Social Fund projects.

To mitigate this “risk”, the agenda papers said that a consultancy would be commissioned to carry out the analysis and produce a summary report, which is scheduled to be published by November 2020.

Officials claimed this would “ensure sufficient resource is available to carry out additional public engagement and to model the feasibility, impact and cost of any potential changes to the AEB for 2021/22, which will need to be finalised by summer 2020”.

A London college principal who wanted to remain anonymous told FE Week it was “a massive inefficiency when every penny counts – and is just wrong”.

And Tony Allen, a former director at the Skills Funding Agency, said it was “an inevitable, completely wasteful, by-product of devolution”.

FE Week previously reported that London mayor Sadiq Khan was having to hire a huge team of new bureaucrats to manage the GLA’s devolved AEB, which totals more than £300 million annually.

In 2018 he was warned that his team of administrators, whose wages are paid for by top-slicing around £3 million from the AEB every year, may not be enough to handle the budget.

London college bosses previously blasted the unintended consequences of devolution, as it siphons funding from frontline learning.

The GLA, along with six other mayoral combined authorities (MCAs), had their area’s share of the AEB devolved to them on August 1, 2019.

FE Week asked the six MCAs if they use their AEB to pay for consultants in the same way the GLA is planning to, but none responded before publication.

The GLA’s consultation will run for four weeks and will be carried out using an online survey.